http://www.osnews.com/story/13137/OSNews_Wishes_Everyone_a_Happy_2006_the_Final_Major_Change Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Tue, 01 Dec 2009 14:40:59 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif http://www.osnews.com http://osnews.com/thread?80367 http://osnews.com/thread?80367 Woohoo! Happy New Year to everyone @ OSNEWS and all the visitors too! Sat, 31 Dec 2005 17:51:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (ankitmalik) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80368 http://osnews.com/thread?80368 And I hope the moderators will be more gentle in their communications [in the comments section] in the coming year... one of the resolutions maybe? Sat, 31 Dec 2005 17:52:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (ankitmalik) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80370 http://osnews.com/thread?80370 one of the resolutions maybe?

I'll have a drink on it tonight . Sat, 31 Dec 2005 17:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Thom_Holwerda) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80379 http://osnews.com/thread?80379 w00t! Sat, 31 Dec 2005 18:17:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (broken_symlink) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80380 http://osnews.com/thread?80380 Sat, 31 Dec 2005 18:20:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (cole) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80382 http://osnews.com/thread?80382 "But let's get back to that final, big change I mentioned. By very, very popular demand, we have disabled anonymous commenting-- forever. There will be no turning back.

What took you so long??? Sat, 31 Dec 2005 18:24:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (ThawkTH) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80383 http://osnews.com/thread?80383 Very nice work handling the site, and I have noticed that large stories load faster.

Great job and keep up the good work. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 18:24:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (ckknight) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80386 http://osnews.com/thread?80386 One resolution from everybody should be to not attack the staff directly Sat, 31 Dec 2005 18:28:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Kroc) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80388 http://osnews.com/thread?80388 Point! Sat, 31 Dec 2005 18:33:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (ankitmalik) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80392 http://osnews.com/thread?80392 [dutch] Gelukkig nieuwjaar en de beste wensen! [/dutch]

Happy newyear!

I've learned a lot from this community, so.... thanks everyone for all your activities on osnews in 2005!! Sat, 31 Dec 2005 18:38:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (evert) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80393 http://osnews.com/thread?80393 What is this, Thom? Stickin' it to that anonymous bastard[1] in the Syllable thread? I mean, this has to be a personally motivated decision--no rational person would consider this in favor of the site's growth. And don't give me the quality argument; we've done this before--it's been established that you just got less of the same crap comments.

So please, explain. I'm actually very interested in knowing the real reason[2] behind the PR.

[1]http://www.osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=13115&comment_id=79...
[2]http://osnews.com/meta/read.php/1136041002/anonymous_posting_gone_f... Sat, 31 Dec 2005 18:39:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Alex Forster) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80394 http://osnews.com/thread?80394 Keep it up, and happy new year! Sat, 31 Dec 2005 18:39:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Ben2040) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80395 http://osnews.com/thread?80395 As the year draws to a close here in New Mexico, I only want to thank the staff of OS News for doing a great job all year long. There were some rough spots, but that is what makes life interesting!

Thanks to all the people who visted, thanks for the insights, the flamewars, and genuinely interesting discussions.

I, for one, am looking forward to an even better year in 2006!

Happy New Year to all! Sat, 31 Dec 2005 18:41:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Cyberbear) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80397 http://osnews.com/thread?80397 lol I never attack the staff

That's usually the quickest and surest way to be banned from a site, maybe not OSnews, but in general lol.

Getting rid of anonymous is a good idea. Now there won't be as many "idiotic" and random posts are there used to. I think it's a sensible idea to take responsibility for what you post, not say something "bad" and then hide as anonymous.

This is my first year at OSNews, and it's a good one so far. Keep up the good work

--ZaNkY Sat, 31 Dec 2005 18:42:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (ZaNkY) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80398 http://osnews.com/thread?80398 OSNews is by far the best computer platform site on the Web. I've been coming here for years and am always impressed by the excellent coverage and high (usually) quality of comments. I wish you all the best in 2006!

Jared Sat, 31 Dec 2005 18:42:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (JaredWhite) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80403 http://osnews.com/thread?80403 Good wishes for OSNews in this new year! Thanks Eugenia for all this quality until now and thanks too the the rest of the osnews' crew who maintained this quality and are trying to make the whole site better for its users.

A new year of good news and happiness for all! Sat, 31 Dec 2005 18:52:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (JrezIN) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80405 http://osnews.com/thread?80405 The improvements to the commenting system is so much better now, so congrats for that. The only thing that I would like to see improved is a decent search engine. Thankfully, OSNews does prodide a link to search via Google, but I can't help thinking that some efforts towards to the inhouse search capabilities would be better for OSNews and its users. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 18:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (arooaroo) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80407 http://osnews.com/thread?80407 May this year bring all of us health , wealth and peace , and many OS to review and disagree on ;-) Sat, 31 Dec 2005 18:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Moulinneuf) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80411 http://osnews.com/thread?80411 There is no reason other than 1) people requested it, and 2) the test we did a few months ago (we disabled anon. posting for a week) was succesful (higher comment-quality). So there you have it.

My word is all I can give you. As I said, I was against it at first (someone else on the team proposed it), it took months before people even convinced me of doing a *test*, let alone making it for real. But then again, you seem to have your mind made up already, so there really is no use in debating this.Edited 2005-12-31 19:08 Sat, 31 Dec 2005 19:04:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Thom_Holwerda) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80412 http://osnews.com/thread?80412 I for one am happy that this is being implemented as other news sites and most forum sites already require registered users to post comments. It provides not only an organized structure but also makes it easier when replying to posts as well for casual readers to read comments. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 19:06:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Dark_Knight) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80413 http://osnews.com/thread?80413 Happy new year to everyone at OSNews both staff and subscribers.

Cheers Sat, 31 Dec 2005 19:08:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Dark_Knight) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80415 http://osnews.com/thread?80415 I'm not so sure about the anonymous thing.

It's not so much that I'm not sure but that I don't see you so sure either. I mean, there was that experiment in November and after that Adam wrote in Meta:
Our little experiment to disallow anonymous posting on OSNews taught us a few things.
[...]
3. It was a nice break, but it wasn't the solution.

I personally don't care much about it either way, but let me ask, if it wasn't the solution a month ago, is it now? How have things changed? What other solutions did you consider, or is this a least evil?

I'm just asking, really.

And, again, Happy New Year! Sat, 31 Dec 2005 19:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (gonzalo) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80417 http://osnews.com/thread?80417 My comment on the subject has already been deleted proving that I was infact correct in that you are frigging nazis and the opinions of the "editors" are the only opinions that are allowed.

Deleted in 3 .. 2 .. 1 .. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 19:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (soumynona) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80418 http://osnews.com/thread?80418 How many?

I bet you don't have any solid numbers other than Eugenia wanted it. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 19:23:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (soumynona) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80420 http://osnews.com/thread?80420 Now, we all just get to make up stupid shit names and when they get deleted like this one will in 10 minutes we will need to make another one. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 19:24:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (soumynona) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80421 http://osnews.com/thread?80421 Maybe the staff should refrain from attacking their users then.

Happened to me, and it's why I went anonymous. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 19:25:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (soumynona) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80430 http://osnews.com/thread?80430 you are frigging nazis

It's just not a very wise thing to go and call people nazi, mister. Nazi is a very insulting word, there are a lot of people on this planet, namely who's six million friends, relatives and neighbours got murdered, who wouldn't like you for saying that. But anyway, happy new year to you too.

3. It was a nice break, but it wasn't the solution.

That was kind of Adam on his own, basically. He assumed we all agreed, but it never was thrown into the group to discuss. A few days after that blog posting, I ressurected the isue, asking what we were all thinking. Then the discussion got going.

I bet you don't have any solid numbers other than Eugenia wanted it.

I'm not going to disclose personal information, but I think we get about 2 emails each week asking for us to disable it (that may not seem like a lot, but remember, it makes up for about 50% to 70% of all the personal emails to osnews-crew@osnews.com we get). Other than that, regular readers have often said it in the comments (ie: http://www.osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=13132&comment_id=80... ). Sat, 31 Dec 2005 19:56:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Thom_Holwerda) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80431 http://osnews.com/thread?80431 Thanks... this is the best news I've heard from OSNews all year! Sat, 31 Dec 2005 19:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (ozar) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80434 http://osnews.com/thread?80434 Is the absolutely horrid abuse of tables in the HMTL (apparently hyper-mega-table language). That said I'm surprised how smoothely the transition has been. The improvements to the comment and rating system have been a great additions to the site... though at one point it seems like you are almost rewriting SLASH from scratch, but it's working well. Though I miss the way Eugenia always had tons of sites and original contributions which seem to had slowed down. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:02:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (CaptainPinko) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80436 http://osnews.com/thread?80436 Peace, Prosperity, Health, Happiness and Satisfaction in all you do, wherever you may be in 2006.

I am looking forward to the thought provoking comments on the "Industry Watch" gateway that OSNews has become. Its not just about alternate OS's anymore - it has expanded without anyone really noticing. That's why it will remain my home on the net in 2006.

Thanks folks. Great work. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:06:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (RGCook) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80441 http://osnews.com/thread?80441 I agree completely. It should reduce the troll count some. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:19:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (madcap) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80443 http://osnews.com/thread?80443 Thank goodness for no anonymous posting. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:23:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Mystilleef) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80447 http://osnews.com/thread?80447 I'm glad for all the changes. I never understood anonymous posting - it goes against the whole concept of an online community.

Eugenia also always got accused of being "pro" or "anti" everything too. It's hilarious because it's so impossible.

Great work everyone!! Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:35:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (parrotjoe) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80450 http://osnews.com/thread?80450 Cry for me, I have many relatives that are *** and they wouldn't have been offended by my comment.

This change is exactly that, just because you don't agree it doesn't mean it's not true.

Look it up.

Edit: Oh, look at that your site won't even let me say *j e w i s h*.

Hmm, it let me say *n a z i* though.Edited 2005-12-31 20:39 Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:37:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (soumynona) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80451 http://osnews.com/thread?80451 Ok, thanks for the explanation.

I still don't have a strong opinion on the subject but if you're really convinced about wanting it this way, then by all means, go ahead with the plan.


I hope 2006 will be a good year for OSNews. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:41:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (gonzalo) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80452 http://osnews.com/thread?80452 How many readers do you have?

Only 2-3 per week requested it, how many were the same person making the request?

Sounds like you implemented something that less than 1% of your reader base asked for.

Yeah, that's a smart idea. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:42:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (soumynona) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80453 http://osnews.com/thread?80453 I feel compelled to finally have registred, after 3 years of lurking, to make a comment.

Thank you. There were so many times in the past three years that I stopped reading the comments because of lame ass anonymous users. If you don't have the balls to attach your name to something you write, don't post it.

I like the direction OSNews is going. Certainly I have disagreed with some of Eugenia's and others "News" in the past but it wasn't enough to have me go calling people Nazi's.

I mean its not like this registration process cost us money and we have no say. We are but mere guests here in the long run of things.

So again, thank you for the decision to disallow anonymous comments!Edited 2005-12-31 20:43 Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:42:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Guinness) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80454 http://osnews.com/thread?80454 I was anonymous yesterday, yet I'm not today.

Who am I?

I'm still anonymous.

Happy New Year. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:43:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (soumynona) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80455 http://osnews.com/thread?80455 That you can randomize anonymous in and of itself a feat worth bragging about , as well as your IP no doubt. Fight the man .

All I'm saying is it certainly is about time they did away with the /. anonymous morons. I have not set foot on slashdot page in almost two years. It was no longer the insightful place of my early twentysomethings. Its a bitter crowd over there.

Here I like at least some form of thought to go into a comment. Attaching a name to your comment hopefully makes you think about it for a second. Well in SOME peoples instant a nano second at any rate.

I LOVE the interent and its randomness and anonymous areas but sometimes you need to be accountable to a community and this place needed it.

Happy New Years all! Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:47:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Guinness) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80456 http://osnews.com/thread?80456 For someone who does not like this site, you sure do comment a lot.

Only 2-3 per week requested it, how many were the same person making the request?

None. Want to know why? Because I emailed them back.

But anyway, why don't you go on and count the people in this thread who agree with what I'm doing? Seems like you are the only one disagreeing... Of course, people who are anonymous can't comment, so they can't voice themselves in this thread either... But hey, if you can twist the facts, than why can't I? . Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:50:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Thom_Holwerda) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80458 http://osnews.com/thread?80458 If I set my treshold to 3, I see 4 comments. 3 of those comments were made by "osn staff", so they don't really count. All the other comments are hidden. Where are these high-quality comments from the registered users?

Other than that, happy 2006. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (DoNotBugMe) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80459 http://osnews.com/thread?80459 well now that anonymous posting is not permitted you might want to relax the score threshold. i'm not sure yet how this voting thing works otherwise there are a few i would have voted up already.

no it would not have just been staff . backwards anonymous did have a post or two that was insightful and at the least thought provoking.

=/ meh. i'll figure it out soon enough i suppose. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Guinness) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80461 http://osnews.com/thread?80461 Well, let me be the next to make a new email account every week and send you an email to allow anonymous postings again. Sure, some people will agree but it's a holiday and like you said anonymous people can't voice their opinions anymore because you stomped them out.

Where did I twist the facts at? Come on, you are supposed to be an "editor".

I post alot, but I doubt I'll be back often now. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 21:01:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (soumynona) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80464 http://osnews.com/thread?80464 Couldn't agree More. If the editors dont agree with your comments they attack you, Mod down or delete your post and then threaten to delete your account. Thank god for webmail I can just keep creating a new account. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 21:06:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (osnanon1) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80465 http://osnews.com/thread?80465 You have yet to really offer your opinion on why this is a bad thing? How does registering for an account to post really inconvenience you or anyone else for that matter. What it does do is cut down on the retarded "Microsft sucks", "Linux sucks" comments that I often got disenchanted over.

Even with moderators it is a daunting task to catch every single one of em.

Even with non-anonymous posts you will still get the "gifted" few who don't quite get the old addage if you don't have somthing nice to say then don't say anything at all. In this example "nice" not being nice in general but from my stand point at least something relative to the article in which the user is commenting. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 21:07:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Guinness) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80466 http://osnews.com/thread?80466 Thom, You can't count the people who liked the anonymous posting becuse... Um you disabled it and thereby silenced their Voice. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 21:11:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (osnanon1) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80468 http://osnews.com/thread?80468 yay more no more anonymous posting! Sat, 31 Dec 2005 21:13:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Asamoya) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80469 http://osnews.com/thread?80469 A lot of peoples votes went to modding down idiot anonymous posts. Hopefully we will see more votes go to good posts now. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 21:17:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sappyvcv) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80470 http://osnews.com/thread?80470 It is one of the favourite web sites for me. Just wish everyone in here a happy new year. I wish that in 2006 OSNews would more and more interesting for everyone. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 21:18:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (vezhlys) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80473 http://osnews.com/thread?80473 Thom, You can't count the people who liked the anonymous posting becuse... Um you disabled it and thereby silenced their Voice.

Why don't you read my post in its entirity? Sat, 31 Dec 2005 21:20:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Thom_Holwerda) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80474 http://osnews.com/thread?80474 I'm all for registered users only, the anonymae thing was quite annoying.
But secondly, grow up Thom. I don't mean to insult you. However, people are going to. Such is the life of a mod/admin. If you take it personally and attack back they'll eat you alive in the long run.
I recommend swallowing your feelings and dealing with people in the most judicious manner you can. And if they are being polite and discussing, acting like you normally do (cause you're a great contributor until you get on a personal defense).

Ignore them, the rest of us tend to anyway. Until you attack back.

Oh, and, don't slow up . OSNews has had a pretty good pace lately; keep it up. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 21:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (ma_d) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80475 http://osnews.com/thread?80475 "Help help I'm being repressed!" Sat, 31 Dec 2005 21:27:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Kroc) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80478 http://osnews.com/thread?80478 Ah, I see now. Sorry I hit that stupid comment and stopped reading the comment there like I do with all Stupid comments. Howver seeing your role in this I thought I would reply.

Imagine that I skip over the comments I don't think have any value....

What a novel idea. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 21:29:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (osnanon1) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80479 http://osnews.com/thread?80479 Aside from the fact that somebody here is trying to prove that trolls don't have to be anonymous, what exactly is your problem with the end to anonymous postings?

If you really care, start a petition. If you're nice to Thom, he might even link to it :-)

Meanwhile, it's great to have OSNews back, minus most of the trolls...

Happy New Year everybody! Sat, 31 Dec 2005 21:46:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (dhazeghi) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80483 http://osnews.com/thread?80483 " I know myself well, hence I also know I can be harsh, direct, and arrogant. That's no surprise at all for me. Hey, I'm just a human too, I make mistakes. However, that does not mean I will change my tone. There are occasions where I truly feel offended; especially when it comes to all the biases I have been accused of (pro-Microsoft, pro-Apple, anti-KDE, pro-GNOME, anti-Microsoft, anti-Apple, pro-KDE, anti-GNOME, etc. etc.). I will never accept it when my integrity gets questioned. So, if you do question my integrity, you can expect a frontal gale (as we Dutch say)."

Unfortunately, many times I have seen you stoop down to the level of those very trolls that happen to question your integrity. I quite vividly remember you questioning other people's integrity, which is quite hypocritical any way you look at it -- so, it's OK for Thom to question someone's integrity, but be aware of the full frontal Dutch gale coming your way if you dare to question his. I think such attitude sends wrong kind of signals to your readers.

I'm not saying that you shouldn't defend yourself, but I just don't think that giving a troll a taste of its own medicine is befitting an editor of an online news site of this caliber. You could always try being a bigger person and instead of throwing a hissy fit (which is exactly what it ends up looking like, by the way) defend yourself in a calm, professional manner.

OK, nevermind the above. You're so cute when you're angry. Happy New Year, hairless monkey.

-- Snifflez the Zombie Squirrel. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 21:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Snifflez) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80485 http://osnews.com/thread?80485 Enjoy the peace and quiet.

I thinking reading slashdot or digg or theserverside and ignoring any of the comments there is a better option. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 22:03:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (doug) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80486 http://osnews.com/thread?80486 My problem with the end of the anonymous posting is that the comment sections will not only lose the Trolls but also some valuable and insightful input.

I prefer to Post anonymously as that way people can't associate my comments as coming from a person slanted one way or the other. Otherwise people tend to read comments and respond to comments based upon comments I may have made in the past.

Instead now I will just have to create new ID's every so often. This is my 3rd on osnews since anonymous posting was originally disabled back in November.

I wonder what number I will be at by the end of next year Sat, 31 Dec 2005 22:11:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (osnanon1) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80488 http://osnews.com/thread?80488 Registering for comments on 100 sites on the web? how annoying is that Sat, 31 Dec 2005 22:28:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (BMNT) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80489 http://osnews.com/thread?80489 Well, you can get a life... Sat, 31 Dec 2005 22:33:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (vecchio) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80490 http://osnews.com/thread?80490 I find it utterly hilarious that people would go through the amount of time to do this for a freaking post. What a giant waste of time. If you don't like the direction just don't comment, or more to the point just stop coming.

Enjoy the peace and silence? I will. Not every freaking article needs 100+ comments with varying degrees of "you suck", "no, you suck". I'll take less comments if I can deal without the lame 4 word poignant replies . Sat, 31 Dec 2005 22:39:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Guinness) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80491 http://osnews.com/thread?80491 That's got to be one of the most usefull sites I have ever seen.

Thanks!! Sat, 31 Dec 2005 22:41:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (osnanon1) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80492 http://osnews.com/thread?80492 Hey cool!
THANKS FOR THE LINK! Sat, 31 Dec 2005 22:45:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (DoNotBugMe) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80493 http://osnews.com/thread?80493 "I'm still anonymous."

No, you are not. You just registered and I have already read ~6 of your comments.

It is much easier to associate comments based on name then trying to remember which anon user is which based on the first 3 octets of their IP address. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 22:47:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Jody) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80495 http://osnews.com/thread?80495 see you in 2006, year of the Linux desktop, again. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 22:52:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Mitarai) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80496 http://osnews.com/thread?80496 Thanks Thom and everyone else for a very entertaining and mostly informative site...fights and all. I am happy that people will "identify" themselves...maybe "think" a bit before making a really stupid post!

HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!

From a Linux Desktop....it was 2002 for me.... Sat, 31 Dec 2005 22:54:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Bobmeister) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80497 http://osnews.com/thread?80497 And look how quickly you went and signed up for an account :-). No more hiding now.

Great job OSNews...time to get things back on track around here (things have deteriorated quite a bit over the past year, so here's looking to an awesome '06). Things just keep getting better and better!

-jayson (a loyal OSNews reader for 4 years and counting). Sat, 31 Dec 2005 22:55:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (jayson.knight) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80498 http://osnews.com/thread?80498 Do you know my name?

No.

How do you know I'm not 5 different accounts now that you don't see my IP address anymore?

You can't.

I could be ydoj or odie or garfield for that matter all posting at once.

Removing "anonymous" solves nothing. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 22:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (soumynona) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80499 http://osnews.com/thread?80499 There is also http://www.spamgourmet.com/

Great site, highly recommended. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 23:01:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (soumynona) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80501 http://osnews.com/thread?80501 LOL and all it takes is for them to decide to limit the number of IP's associated with an account. My community site does this. I limit it to two IP's. Work and home, School and home, so on and so forth.

You keep rambling on like you are the first person to figure out sharing an account to bypass this stuff. All it does is force there hand into associating IP's with an account. Much like I had to do.

Once again you pay 0 dollars for this community. I'd let the people who do pay the bills do what the want and feel is best. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 23:11:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Guinness) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80502 http://osnews.com/thread?80502 I don't get it. Bugmenot is basically so you don't have to register to read articles from sites like NYT which require registration just to look at the content. You can do everything on osnews -- except post comments.

If you want to post, and you're going to go through the effort of going to bugmenot, getting a login, and logging in -- shit, why not just register yourself?

Whatever floats your boat, I guess. Sat, 31 Dec 2005 23:13:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Adam S) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80505 http://osnews.com/thread?80505 Let me first say that I do support this, since it makes conversations much easier to read and I'm not a tinfoil hat person.

What I find really funny, though, is that, according to the stats page, the "Average Anonymous Comment Score" is finally positive. 0.01 for anonymous, and 0.28 (if you ignore the magic +1 boost) for registered. Well, I guess we'll see how it works out, eh? Sat, 31 Dec 2005 23:25:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Roguelazer) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80506 http://osnews.com/thread?80506 Cool. Thanks. for any gmail users you should also check out gmail aliases. http://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=12096&topic... Sat, 31 Dec 2005 23:28:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (DoNotBugMe) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80507 http://osnews.com/thread?80507 I mean, really, isn't it evident that Anonymous comments are a vehicle for trolling? Somewhere I read a comic (probably penny arcade) where they, very insightfully, made the equation:

normal person + anonimity + audience => f*ckwad


Thank you very much for all the great work that you guys are doing on OSNews, it is truly becoming a force to reckon with! May 2006 be a good year for us all! Sat, 31 Dec 2005 23:32:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (mario) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80508 http://osnews.com/thread?80508 I won't register...Browser: Lynx/2.8.6dev.16-MirOS (compatible; MSIE 6.0; UNIX) libwww-FM/2.14 SSL-MM/1.4.1 OpenSSL/0.9.7g Sat, 31 Dec 2005 23:38:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80510 http://osnews.com/thread?80510 As many of osnews fans, I would like to wish all your staff a Happy New year especially to Eugenia (I love you!!!) , thanks for providing us the last reviews and notices of the OS-world.

Never change Osnews...!!! Sat, 31 Dec 2005 23:51:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (chocloman) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80511 http://osnews.com/thread?80511 This is mario, so I am not completely anonymous. The "test" post (apparently, by an Anonymous user) has inspired me to try and do it myself. Let's see...Browser: Lynx/2.8.4rel.1 libwww-FM/2.14 SSL-MM/1.4.1 OpenSSL/0.9.6b Sat, 31 Dec 2005 23:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80513 http://osnews.com/thread?80513 Now that I have register. I feel i belong to an elite
club. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 00:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (happycamper) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80514 http://osnews.com/thread?80514 You do :O Sun, 01 Jan 2006 00:25:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (mcduck) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80517 http://osnews.com/thread?80517 a Unanimous posting. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 00:34:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Unanimous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80518 http://osnews.com/thread?80518 Just test, I'm sorry :-)Browser: Symbian OS; Series 90 special OsNews Edition Sun, 01 Jan 2006 00:37:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80520 http://osnews.com/thread?80520 Notice the username: suomynona -- anonymous

+1, very true, and they know that. I don't know what the hell brought this on. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 00:44:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Alex Forster) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80521 http://osnews.com/thread?80521 I posted anonymous because I only felt it necessary to correct trollish comments without it affecting my karma one way or another. Unfortunately, the editors of this site prefered the origional troll to my correction of the troll comment. The have said for example... correct him once, and let it be done with... yet they didn't tell the troll to stop trolling. Otherwise, they might just debate me altogether on the trollish comments that i was correcting... as if they made the comment under a psudonym.

What do you do when the editors agree with the trolls and then they take every effort to make sure you can't correct them? Sun, 01 Jan 2006 00:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (1234) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80525 http://osnews.com/thread?80525 ascheinberg : there is a firefox extension for bugmenot.com that automates most of the process :-) Sun, 01 Jan 2006 01:07:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (BMNT) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80526 http://osnews.com/thread?80526 "I just don't think that giving a troll a taste of its own medicine is befitting an editor of an online news site of this caliber."

You just justified why 9 out of 10 anonymous people here are so, and why they have no problems blasting the editors of this site.

The f-ing ask for it by treating their readers like sh*t. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 01:08:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (soumynona) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80527 http://osnews.com/thread?80527 Well, now that I've thought about it and reflected back. They have given the people you call trolls (in some cases undeservatively) more power as you can't tell who is who anymore by the subnet they come from.

The troll that used to be (xx.xxx.xxx) is now ydoj or blue or fred.

No one will know (which is very likely already happening, but now it will just get worse).

So, it's really a good thing for everyone but the people that wanted to eliminate Anonymous. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 01:15:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (soumynona) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80528 http://osnews.com/thread?80528 It'll be interesting to see how this experiment works out. Out of curiosity why do you keep spelling "wishes" as "whishes"? Sun, 01 Jan 2006 01:17:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (BMNT) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80529 http://osnews.com/thread?80529 The cryptic subject means - HAPPY NEW YEAR! - in estonian. Best wishes to OSNews team and to all posters! Sun, 01 Jan 2006 01:24:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (DonQ) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80531 http://osnews.com/thread?80531 I suppose that people will be people and do their best to try and find a way around it. I also believe that there are very few people who will go out of their way to abuse the system, so I doubt we'll need to write code to try to prevent it.

...unless it becomes a widespread problem. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 01:30:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Adam S) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80532 http://osnews.com/thread?80532 Wierd, I couldn't post anonymously in Opera, but it looks like I can in a
text-based browser.Browser: w3m/0.5.1 Sun, 01 Jan 2006 01:31:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80533 http://osnews.com/thread?80533 Not likely. If there are too many sign ups from the same non-commonplace domain, our exception reporting notices it. If you think it's wortwhile to sign up for a new Yahoo/Gmail/Hotmail account every 30 days just to continue to use OSnews semi-anonymously, well, more power to you. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 01:34:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Adam S) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80537 http://osnews.com/thread?80537 You IP isn't hidden for long... Sun, 01 Jan 2006 01:38:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (DittoBox) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80539 http://osnews.com/thread?80539 Thom may fly off the handle every great once in a while (who doesn't?), but I personally won't believe any of you can't tell the difference between the week that anonymous comments were allowed and when they weren't. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 01:43:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (DittoBox) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80541 http://osnews.com/thread?80541 As a moderator of a medium to large art forum, I can say that this is one of the best decisions made here. I fully and completely support you guys.

I can't imagine running a forum or comments forum for any length of time with any amount of people in a community with anonymous posting allowed.

If the few people who want to voice their opinion care enough about doing so, they'll register. Otherwise whatever drivel they were going to post isn't worth hearing for me, no matter how much I agree.

A fool's talk brings a rod to his back, but the lips of the wise protect them. Proverbs 14:3 Sun, 01 Jan 2006 01:49:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (DittoBox) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80542 http://osnews.com/thread?80542 Correct. Text based browsers currently can post anonymously.

We'll see how long we permit that. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 01:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Adam S) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80543 http://osnews.com/thread?80543 Why should one have to stoop to using a PoS graphical browser to post here non-anonymously?Browser: ELinks/0.11rc0 (textmode; Darwin 8.3.0 Power Macintosh; 80x40-3) Sun, 01 Jan 2006 02:17:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80546 http://osnews.com/thread?80546 They are trying to become a big site, however they lack the practical experience to do it in a way that they retain their existing readers.

That said, I 3 years ago read 10+ times a day. 2 years ago, I realized how immature the editor(s) were. 1 year ago I went anonymous and read every few days.

Now? I doubt I'll read even once a week. Today I've been here the most I've been here in months.

Unfortunately, Slashdot is higher quality.

Back to real websites.

Adios. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 02:30:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (soumynona) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80547 http://osnews.com/thread?80547 when i look at the scores in this thread i'm sure that we still start at +1 instead of 0
maybe this should be changed back Sun, 01 Jan 2006 02:35:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (smashIt) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80549 http://osnews.com/thread?80549 Everyone at OSNEWS and also the readers hope you have a wonderful and healthy new year. Keep up the great work Thom and crew. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 03:02:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (BHodges) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80551 http://osnews.com/thread?80551 "That said, I 3 years ago read 10+ times a day. 2 years ago, I realized how immature the editor(s) were. 1 year ago I went anonymous and read every few days."

Whiners! OSNews still is, and will be one of my favourite bookmarks in the future.

GREAT WORK Thom, Eugenia, Andrew, Adam And a happy new years eve even though it's already 04:07 pm 2006 here in sweden... Sun, 01 Jan 2006 03:09:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (ple_mono) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80552 http://osnews.com/thread?80552 Hey! Anonymous!

I have a great idea!

Leave!

You are free to stop coming at any time.

Truly, your since of entitlement and the others complaining as if you're inalienable rights were being destroyed disgust me. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 03:15:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (ThawkTH) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80553 http://osnews.com/thread?80553 We might work to make the mobile/text-mode browsers posting registered-only too, but this won't happen just yet. We might support some very basic mobile comment login, to supply the login/password every time you have to post a comment or a reply. This is the only way to guarantee that it will work on all mobile browsers (cookies or sessions are not a standard in that world to provide a full "logged in session" at all pages).

Anyways, happy new year everyone! Sun, 01 Jan 2006 03:37:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Eugenia) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80558 http://osnews.com/thread?80558 But making you shut the hell up would solve everything!

"You just justified why 9 out of 10 anonymous people here are so, and why they have no problems blasting the editors of this site."
Because 9 out of 10 anonymous posters are YOU, and as we all know, YOU have no respect for the other users of this website.

"Well, now that I've thought about it and reflected back. They have given the people you call trolls (in some cases undeservatively) more power as you can't tell who is who anymore by the subnet they come from."
You could have registered anyway...

"Now? I doubt I'll read even once a week. Today I've been here the most I've been here in months."
It would be our plesure, so far you've brought nothing but insults to the table, no logical arguments and no usefull ideas at how trolling can be stoped. Infact, I'd go as far to say that in all the time you ever commented on this site, all you did was troll.

As for bugmenot, an automated script that blocks all user names found on that site would be easy to write.

I'm glad that these changes have been made, but there is still one thing that bugs me: I can vote up anyones comments for any reason (perhaps because I agree with them), but to vote down someones comments I have to have a very specific reason, disagreement is not one.

Thats the one thing I'd like to see changed. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 04:50:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Rowan Lewis) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80561 http://osnews.com/thread?80561 Happy new year to everyone.

No anonymous comments? Good. Very good indeed. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 05:50:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (gonzo) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80562 http://osnews.com/thread?80562 It's interesting to watch what will become of this. What I can see is that what I feared is already beginning to happen.

Closing communities is never good, if you don't belive so, you might think about how inbreeding is happening. And this exactly what you can see is beginning to happen here. The closed off you make a group the less room there is for dissent, and the more the groupthink will prevail. The fact that the so called editors of this site are too naive to see through this (look, this is good, if it wasn't where are the dissidents..? yup, it's another Thom "I can't be wrong" Holwerda..) doesn't exactly help.

This will without doubt make this site less interesting, and no doubt it will not only drive visitors away, but it will quite probably to a large extent turn the comments section into a "club of mutual admiration" thingy, which mayby is interesting to those who participate, but very few else. It will clerly make this place less interesting, and there HAS to be better ways of dealing with trolls. Maybe by banning ip's more aggressively, but then on the other hand the distict feeling I get from this place is that from time to time, depending on the subject, trolls aren't just tolerated but even encouraged, so I guess that's hoping for too much.Browser: ELinks/0.10.6 (textmode; Linux 2.6.14.5 i686; 102x52-2) Sun, 01 Jan 2006 05:55:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80563 http://osnews.com/thread?80563 I think we all will enjoy (or already are enjoying) a good drink on it.

Happy New Year! Sun, 01 Jan 2006 05:56:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (drewunwired) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80564 http://osnews.com/thread?80564 What if your IP changes every session? Like the 40% of the web on dial-up... Sun, 01 Jan 2006 06:08:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Alex Forster) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80565 http://osnews.com/thread?80565 now ill have to post my flames with a real nick.. *cries*..

I wish everyone a itsthesameaslastfsckingyearsogetoverit! Sun, 01 Jan 2006 06:14:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (helf) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80566 http://osnews.com/thread?80566 GMail lets you postfix (did I just make a word up?) your e-mail to do just this. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 06:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Alex Forster) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80567 http://osnews.com/thread?80567 "they lack the practical experience to do"

Boy isn't that an understatement. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 06:20:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Alex Forster) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80569 http://osnews.com/thread?80569 "What it does do is cut down on the retarded "Microsft sucks", "Linux sucks" comments that I often got disenchanted over."

HOW!

Will someone please answer me this? Is there some statistical proof that the "haters" are less inclined to register? Watch: Linux isn't ready for the desktop. Vista is going to require I buy a top of the line video card and another stick of ram just to send e-mail. Macs are just eyecandy. And I just beat your solution. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 06:26:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Alex Forster) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80570 http://osnews.com/thread?80570 It assumes that most of the trolls wont bother to register and post, there will be some of course that will register, but then that's where voting comes in handy.

One can only hope tho...

Happy New Years from Guatemala to All, and thanks for the staff for trying to make osnews better, realizing and admitting there are problems and trying to fix them, even with measures that many people wont like is better than apathy and doing nothing at all. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 06:39:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (jsolares) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80575 http://osnews.com/thread?80575 Membership dues are to be paid upon joining. Make all checks payable to The Club of Mutual Admiration.

If you cannot hold a perceived minority position without taking the flak for it, then you should be the first person to doubt your own conviction. This being what it is, you have absolutely nothing to lose in any and all faux oppression. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 08:12:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Get a Life) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80577 http://osnews.com/thread?80577 Happy New Year everyone.

Things I'm looking forward to the most this year:

- OS X on Intel notebooks!
- eComStation 2.0
- Windows Vista - what will it be like?!
- Finally getting Linux-savvy after so many attempts. I know I'd like it, but I screw up every time!
- Major Haiku progress - fingers crossed
- SkyOS FINAL! Yes, yes, yes please
- Continued coverage of minority OS's such as the splendid RiscOS

My thanks to the OSNews.com staff and its readers for many, many happy hours of enjoyable reading (only slightly marred by the trolls) Sun, 01 Jan 2006 09:03:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Sparrowhawk) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80582 http://osnews.com/thread?80582 Closing communities is never good

OSNews is what you folks call a community? Odd, I thought usenet, mailing lists, and forums were communities. This, on the other hand, is a news site .. you know, as in OS*News*. If I was of the view that this was a community site, I can tell you it would suck in more ways than one. However, I prefer to love the site for what it is.

Happy new year, all!!! Sun, 01 Jan 2006 09:44:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (david g) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80586 http://osnews.com/thread?80586 I don't think OSNews has the same problems as Slashdot. When stories get 500 comments you might want to raise the threshold on Slashdot to read the most relevant posts. You don't have the same problem here (yet). I've seen a lot of good comments at 1 that stays that way permanently. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 09:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (kmarius) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80587 http://osnews.com/thread?80587 This has nothing to do with taking flack, that's called a straw man, but i see you are already a subscriber to the club, so I guess there is little point in arguing with you.

Have fun with your little narrowminded club where you all can confirm each others belifs, like "KDE suckzorZ", "I prefer Gnome", and generally pat each others backs (moding up) in cordial conformism.Browser: ELinks/0.10.6 (textmode; Linux 2.6.14.5 i686; 109x52-2) Sun, 01 Jan 2006 10:07:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80588 http://osnews.com/thread?80588 Thank you very much Sparrowhawk. I can't believe it took me to reach comment 113 before anyone actually mentioned something OS related. You restored my faith so I thank you.

'06 is going to be very interesting. Can't wait to get my hands on the new Mac. SkyOS final? Would be very nice to see but I wouldn't hold my breath. Not that I mind. They're doing a great job and they'll take as long as they need to get it right.

For OSN in 06, I'd like to see less infighting about which DE is better. The whole OSS industry is touted as being about 'choice'. I've made my choice. You've made yours. No amount of kicking and screaming will change that. I'd like to see Gnome threads discussing Gnome, and KDE threads discussing KDE. Maybe that's a little too much to ask for? I hope not.

Anyway, I wish all OSNews readers a happy, healthy and prosperous New Year! I'll dedicate a beer for ya Sun, 01 Jan 2006 10:17:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (wakeupneo) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80591 http://osnews.com/thread?80591 Only the genuine comments would be entertained. I have been a reader of OSNews since 2002 became a member in 2005, this is source of computer for me and many others, a place to share points of views and knowledge. Hope this move quells the troll. A Very Happy New Year to you all and specially the staff at OSNews.Edited 2006-01-01 11:03 Sun, 01 Jan 2006 11:00:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (vikramsharma) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80592 http://osnews.com/thread?80592 A real shame to see Anonymous posting go, especially after the trial was originally declared interesting but not the answer. Now it is suddenly seen as a great success.

Some of the best postings I've seen here have been anonymous postings by casual visitors, while a handful of registered users have been pouring vitriol on others or pre-judging people's comments based on who they are. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 11:45:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (DoNotBugMe) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80593 http://osnews.com/thread?80593 happy new year!!! Sun, 01 Jan 2006 11:49:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (CrAsH) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80595 http://osnews.com/thread?80595 We have already identified several accounts coming from the same people. We will, for now, just place them under children's diseases, and in a few weeks, nobody will even remember you used to be able to post anonymously here.

"they lack the practical experience to do"

Boy isn't that an understatement.

Oh Alex, isn't it fun to take your personal grudges out in the open? How's the new SkyOS website coming along? Sun, 01 Jan 2006 12:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Thom_Holwerda) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80597 http://osnews.com/thread?80597 You do realize that it is far better to mod up good posts that to mod down bad ones? Sun, 01 Jan 2006 12:23:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (physeter) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80600 http://osnews.com/thread?80600 I do like the idea needing to register to post a comment. Alot of profanity was beginnig to show up in the
comments. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 12:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (happycamper) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80603 http://osnews.com/thread?80603 ....because the bugmenot guys will eventually have a list of logins for OSNews.com just like they do for other 'exclusive' sites.

And while I agree that:

A) it's annoying as hell to be unable to know if the Anonymous you're posting to is the Anonymous who responded without doing all kinds of backtracking...

and that:

B) Registering nicknames will eliminate the trolls that tried to hijack Archie Steel's accomt (anyone remember that?)

I still think that by requiring people to sign up before making a post we may lose many good comments by people who stumble across this site by random and have something to share only to be put off by the need to register.

Only time will tell I guess; Happy New Year everybody!Edited 2006-01-01 13:18 Sun, 01 Jan 2006 13:11:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (bornagainenguin) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80604 http://osnews.com/thread?80604 Overall, I like the idea of disabling anonymous posting. But I've never once seen an option to login when browing this site with my PDA, so how am I going to be able to post if I'm on my PDA?

Adam Sun, 01 Jan 2006 13:11:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (adamk) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80606 http://osnews.com/thread?80606 Overall, I like the idea of disabling anonymous posting. But I've never once seen an option to login when browing this site with my PDA, so how am I going to be able to post if I'm on my PDA?

You can post anonymously with PDA, text browsers and phones and such. In fact, you can NOT login via those devices.

We are thinking of creating a PDA/phone friendly login. Pure speculation though. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 13:23:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Thom_Holwerda) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80613 http://osnews.com/thread?80613 >Getting rid of anonymous is a good idea. Now there won't be as many "idiotic" and random posts are there used to. I think it's a sensible idea to take responsibility for what you post, not say something "bad" and then hide as anonymous.

It is also a good way to ban and remove all guys that don't think as you. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 14:30:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Duffman) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80614 http://osnews.com/thread?80614 >I'm not going to disclose personal information, but I think we get about 2 emails each week asking for us to disable it.


lol 2 emails each week from the 120000 readers. Yeah, so many people have asked to disable it .... Sun, 01 Jan 2006 14:36:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Duffman) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80615 http://osnews.com/thread?80615 This aleviates (or is it Eleviates?) the problem because most Trolls post anonymously because there is less chance of them having to worry about any consequences where as being required to register makes them question this false sense of 'Immunity' to consequences that may occur as a result of their own actions.

Personally in my experience I have rarely seen a Troll from someone who is a registered member of a site community, like Neowin for example.

Also I will answer your other question about users who have Dynamic IP's, well this is solved by IP bands, ISP's are limited to the IP ranges in which they can use, and in many cases they are then divided again into regional addresses, my ISP does this, they have their main IP range, and then sub-divide that into ranges for different regions. All that will occur is that certain IP ranges would be banned Sun, 01 Jan 2006 14:44:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Andrew Youll) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80622 http://osnews.com/thread?80622 ...and in a few weeks, nobody will even remember you used to be able to post anonymously here. ...

That's uncanny, because any _honest_ regular reader won't be able to remember a single justifiable reason to remove anonymous posting in the first place. I read all articles at standard thresholds and don't miss many comments.

There simply is no _ significant_ problem with anonymous users. If there actually was a problem I would agree with the action taken, but this is clearly not the case.

This is an irrational decision taken to satisfy the peculiar internal politics of OSNews as far as I can make out.Browser: ELinks (0.4pre5; Linux 2.6.0 i686; 176x66) Sun, 01 Jan 2006 15:35:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80624 http://osnews.com/thread?80624 "Oh Alex, isn't it fun to take your personal grudges out in the open? How's the new SkyOS website coming along? "

Precisely why people like to post anonymously. Here is an attack about something totally unrelated to the original comment. And what's worse it's coming from the Managing Editor. Someone who is trying to elevate the level of the comments. Instead he is resorting to personal attacks. Nice... Very nice. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 15:39:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (DoNotBugMe) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80625 http://osnews.com/thread?80625 Precisely why people like to post anonymously. Here is an attack about something totally unrelated to the original comment. And what's worse it's coming from the Managing Editor.

Mister, this isn't an attack-- it's a insider's joke from the SkyOS community, and Alex himself knows that too. Do not comment on things you know nothing about, please.

I find it rather intrigueing that you do not attack iExitium for attacking me and the crew.Edited 2006-01-01 15:51 Sun, 01 Jan 2006 15:48:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Thom_Holwerda) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80626 http://osnews.com/thread?80626 I disagree. I think if you reread Thom's post there were plenty of reasons for the change. Anyways, it is done - we should cease complaining about it.

Anyways, what I look forward to in 2006:

- Vista
- OSX on Intel
- Symphony OS 1.0
- Sky OS Final?
- Many more updates to alternative OSes, such as eCS, AROS, Risc, and Zeta. This all are the type of OSes that making reading OSNews a necessity.

Thanks to the staff for a wonderful 2005, and heres looking to next year! Sun, 01 Jan 2006 15:51:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Dark Leth) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80627 http://osnews.com/thread?80627 This validates my comment that the OSNews crew is immature and unprofessional.

Yet another reason this place is worse than slashdot. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 15:55:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (soumynona) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80628 http://osnews.com/thread?80628 Maybe you and your crew f*cking ask for it with comments like that one.

No one cares that it's "an inside joke"

It's unprofessional, and immature.

Yep, I said I was leaving but I thought I'd check back and boy did I get a laugh by doing so. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 15:56:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (soumynona) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80629 http://osnews.com/thread?80629 Do you know how easy it is to create a mail alias?

Come on, you have to be smarter than this. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 15:58:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (soumynona) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80630 http://osnews.com/thread?80630 Yep, I went from "anonymous" to "anonymous". Sun, 01 Jan 2006 15:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (soumynona) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80636 http://osnews.com/thread?80636 Would like me to come to your house and call you a Nazi for not letting me wipe excrement all over your walls? well suprisingly enough we dont want to you come here and call us Nazis because we wont let you wipe your excrement all over our walls.

Also I find being called a Nazi rather offensive, and do believe you have crossed a line here, dont want to get banned? Respect other peoples opinions and do not bring accusations of a Police-State onto the site the solution is relatively simple to grasp.

Oh and before you begin with "The OSnews team doesnt respect other peoples opinions" well we respect those that are opinions and not just verbal abuse or obvious flamebait and trolling.

And you'd be suprised to find that in fact most members of the OSnews team do very little comment moderation, because other people handle it with the voting system, I personally have only ever used 60 Votes, and only 5 of those were to vote something down. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 16:30:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Andrew Youll) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80639 http://osnews.com/thread?80639 Hey, same to the staff and thanks for all the hard work last year. And Thank you, thank you, thank you for this last big change. I have always been annoyed by anonymous posting. If you don't have the guts to put your handle on a comment, then don't make it.

Thanks again for all the hard work. OSNews is usually the first thing I read in the morning when I hit the computer. (Well, right after getting the coffee brewing that is. I have my priorities straight).

Bill Sun, 01 Jan 2006 16:58:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (protagonist) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80640 http://osnews.com/thread?80640 That's uncanny, because any _honest_ regular reader won't be able to remember a single justifiable reason to remove anonymous posting in the first place. I read all articles at standard thresholds and don't miss many comments.

1. Other registered users were taking the trouble to mod down the anonymous (f)lamers in many stories comments' sections so you didn't find them particularly annoying.

2. You apparently missed the discussions being hijacked by roving mobs of self-styled vigilantes who felt the need to perpetuate the flamewars by attacking the staff.

There simply is no _ significant_ problem with anonymous users. If there actually was a problem I would agree with the action taken, but this is clearly not the case.

Sure there was. For example, it simply wasn't possible to discuss the original subject matter in some stories because every other post was from some anonymous idiot who couldn't refrain from nitpicking about inane stuff such as how the article was posted.

This is an irrational decision taken to satisfy the peculiar internal politics of OSNews as far as I can make out.

No, it's a good decision which has two important consequences:

1. It gives the registered users in the community a means of tracking who makes which comment. It's much harder to start a flamewar when everyone knows you're in the habit of starting them; someone inevitably pipes up and informs the community not to fall into the trap of responding to the flamer. Attaching a name to a lamer also gives him a score history which can indicate whether he cares to make comments worth reading.

2. Even though people can abuse the system - as you are doing ATM - it takes more work now than it used to. Between the anonymous posts and the newly registered nicks with low scores, you've gone and justified the OSNews staff's decision and made fools of yourselves in the process. And I doubt you'll ever realize it, which just makes it all the more satisfying. ;-) Sun, 01 Jan 2006 17:01:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (null_pointer_us) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80641 http://osnews.com/thread?80641 Maybe, but a lot of people won't go to the trouble of registering just to post an inflaming remark. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 17:06:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (protagonist) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80643 http://osnews.com/thread?80643 I like your attitude. If I ever make it to Holland, can I buy you a beer? :-)

Bill Sun, 01 Jan 2006 17:09:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (protagonist) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80644 http://osnews.com/thread?80644 "I was anonymous yesterday, yet I'm not today.

Who am I? "

I was going to post a reply composed of the letters diiot, but thought better of it. :-)

Bill Sun, 01 Jan 2006 17:13:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (protagonist) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80646 http://osnews.com/thread?80646 I can't believe it! I yet again wrote RiscOS when I meant RISC OS. Mind you, the point remains the same - please continue covering minority OS's Edited 2006-01-01 17:16 Sun, 01 Jan 2006 17:15:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Sparrowhawk) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80652 http://osnews.com/thread?80652 1. SMTP tricks (like using the + sign) are already monitored. Multiple addresses to the same domains are alrady monitored. You underestimate our ability to pull information from our own database.

2. Either way, if you really want to skirt the system, go ahead. Those people will likely be ignored anyway - as the community grows and average scores are taken into account. Personally, I think anyone who goes through all that trouble just to be able to post anonymously has larger issues than fitting into the OSNews community. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 17:41:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Adam S) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80653 http://osnews.com/thread?80653 Of course. I was only suggesting what was probably happening. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 17:43:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sappyvcv) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80657 http://osnews.com/thread?80657 1. Other registered users were taking the trouble to mod down the anonymous (f)lamers in many stories comments' sections so you didn't find them particularly annoying.


Since I read at a low threshold anyway I'm afraid the moderation has very little effect on what I end up reading.

2. You apparently missed the discussions being hijacked by roving mobs of self-styled vigilantes who felt the need to perpetuate the flamewars by attacking the staff.

I don't notice significant abuse on a daily basis, certainly nothing to warrant an outright anonymous posting ban. There is always the occasional bad apple as can be seen with a number of registered users.

Sure there was. ...

I've been on enough forums to discriminate between abusive behaviour and the acceptable cut and thrust of comment and debate. I'm not seeing anything abnormal at OSNews.

No, it's a good decision ...

Well it's a decision to solve an imaginary problem ...

2. Even though people can abuse the system - as you are doing ATM - it takes more work now than it used to. Between the anonymous posts and the newly registered nicks with low scores, you've gone and justified the OSNews staff's decision and made fools of yourselves in the process. And I doubt you'll ever realize it, which just makes it all the more satisfying. ;-)

Mmm, I wouldn't say my post is a prime example of why anonymous posting should be banned. Neither would I class myself as a fool, though perhaps I shouldn't be too worried about your comment since your opening gambit consisted of explaining to me how moderation had saved my soul, when I had already explained I used a low threshold (-1) for comments and read nearly all of them anyway - which really does make the end to this post "all the more satisfying". ;-)Browser: ELinks (0.4pre5; Linux 2.6.0 i686; 176x66) Sun, 01 Jan 2006 17:48:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80658 http://osnews.com/thread?80658 "You just justified why 9 out of 10 anonymous people here are so, and why they have no problems blasting the editors of this site."

Really? Wow. I must have some secret superpowers that I'm not aware of. I wasn't even talking about the anonymous people. I didn't realize my comments had hidden meanings. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 17:48:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Snifflez) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80659 http://osnews.com/thread?80659 Cool. Pat yourself on the back now, and don't forget to inform everyone just how smart you are. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 17:50:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Snifflez) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80666 http://osnews.com/thread?80666 I can't help but laugh at the response some people are having to this decision. Police state! Oppression! Our rights are being taken away by the biased and reactionary mods!

First, this is a private site. You have no rights here other than what you're given. They can be given and taken at any time. If you don't like it, get a group together and start your own site.

Second, you should be far more concerned with actual risks of police states and gestapo tactics throughout the world.

If the removal of anonymous posting TRULY makes you spend THAT much energy, rather than trying to, say, work for equality and justice throughout the world - well, you are a truly sad and immature human being.

Truly, have you NOTHING better to do? Sun, 01 Jan 2006 18:05:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (ThawkTH) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80667 http://osnews.com/thread?80667 "Why should one have to stoop to using a PoS graphical browser to post here non-anonymously?"

Browser is just a tool; using a text-mode browser doesn't make you "cooler" than everybody else. You really don't have to climb down from your elitist heaven to post here anonymously, because, to tell you the truth, there are no such heaven at all -- you're simply imagining it. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 18:10:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Snifflez) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80669 http://osnews.com/thread?80669 indeed, registration is annoying even for trolls.
they'll just use bugmenot.com.
just as i did. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 18:12:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (DoNotBugMe) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80674 http://osnews.com/thread?80674 indeed, registration is annoying even for trolls.
they'll just use bugmenot.com.
just as i did.

And we'll just set up a scritp, or do it manually, to block each and every account listed on BugMeNot.

It's just a few more minutes of work, added to the few hours a day, I work for OSNews. Easy enough. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 18:17:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Thom_Holwerda) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80677 http://osnews.com/thread?80677 I just love how you've conveniently "forgot" to address what possibly is the #1 reason why many people (myself included) prefer registered posting:

"1. It gives the registered users in the community a means of tracking who makes which comment. It's much harder to start a flamewar when everyone knows you're in the habit of starting them; someone inevitably pipes up and informs the community not to fall into the trap of responding to the flamer. Attaching a name to a lamer also gives him a score history which can indicate whether he cares to make comments worth reading." Sun, 01 Jan 2006 18:33:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Snifflez) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80679 http://osnews.com/thread?80679 Since I read at a low threshold anyway I'm afraid the moderation has very little effect on what I end up reading.

You said that you read at a standard threshold (-1), so the comments I and others mod down to -2 or below slip below your threshold. If you take the time to read those, that's great. There's always the chance that someone will be modded down for no valid reason.

I don't notice significant abuse on a daily basis, certainly nothing to warrant an outright anonymous posting ban. There is always the occasional bad apple as can be seen with a number of registered users.

I did notice significant abuse on a daily basis, certainly enough to warrant an outright anonymous posting ban. And comparing anonymous posters to registered users is like comparing apples and oranges as I've already explained.

I've been on enough forums to discriminate between abusive behaviour and the acceptable cut and thrust of comment and debate. I'm not seeing anything abnormal at OSNews.

I've been on enough forums to discriminate between abusive behavior and the acceptable cut and thrust of comment and debate. I'm seeing a definite problem at OSNews.

Well it's a decision to solve an imaginary problem ...

Nope. And in case you didn't notice, these anecdotes and simple restatements of previous positions aren't helping to lift the ban on anonymous posting.

Mmm, I wouldn't say my post is a prime example of why anonymous posting should be banned. Neither would I class myself as a fool, though perhaps I shouldn't be too worried about your comment since your opening gambit consisted of explaining to me how moderation had saved my soul, when I had already explained I used a low threshold (-1) for comments and read nearly all of them anyway - which really does make the end to this post "all the more satisfying". ;-)

I didn't explain that moderation had saved your soul, nor was it an opening gambit; I merely said that it affected your perception of what you read. Moreover, you continue to prove my point by evading the issue. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 18:35:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (null_pointer_us) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80684 http://osnews.com/thread?80684 Inside joke or not it's irrelevant to the topic and to the vast majority of other people it appears as a personal attack. Save your inside jokes for an inside message board unless that is what you are trying to create here?

Sorry if you fell I'm attacking you but I'm only pointing out your hypocrisy. I don't care what everyone else may say however as you are the Managing Editor I hold you much more responsible for what you write and say especially given what you expect others to do.

If you wish to improve the quality of the comments you should start with yourself and welcome open debate among the community no matter how people wish to post. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 18:51:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (osnanon2) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80686 http://osnews.com/thread?80686 Re: "It is also a good way to ban and remove all guys that don't think as you."

Moderators who do their job don't typically ban posters who dissagree with their point of view. They do have a right to ban a poster when he/she attitude gets out of hand. Such as using vulgar language or when attacking/insulting others which does little if anything to benefit readers. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 18:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Dark_Knight) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80689 http://osnews.com/thread?80689 Inside joke or not it's irrelevant to the topic and to the vast majority of other people it appears as a personal attack. Save your inside jokes for an inside message board unless that is what you are trying to create here?

God, it mustn't be fun to be a in a group with you. As soon as two people laugh, you demand they shut up, just because they didn't involve you. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 18:58:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Thom_Holwerda) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80690 http://osnews.com/thread?80690 Yet again another perosnl attack by the Manageing editor. Way to go Thom... Sun, 01 Jan 2006 19:00:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (osnanon2) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80691 http://osnews.com/thread?80691 You sure do see personal attacks everywhere. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 19:02:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Thom_Holwerda) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80694 http://osnews.com/thread?80694 I registered. You just put an end to years of laziness! Sun, 01 Jan 2006 19:33:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (dubdubdub) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80698 http://osnews.com/thread?80698 Well done putting an end to anonymous posting: I had been suggesting it for a long time. It is an important step in the right direction.
However another problem remains, and that is moderation.
As I have written in the Meta Blog, moderation is still being used improperly, namely to mod down posts one doesn't agree with. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 19:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous Penguin) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80705 http://osnews.com/thread?80705 Hehe, I have dynamic IP!!!

Well, I seriously don't have a reason for making many nicks or going anonymous... I haven't been attacked or anything AFAIK Sun, 01 Jan 2006 20:23:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (jaboua) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80709 http://osnews.com/thread?80709 Adios to you too. Either come to the site or don't, but I sure get a kick out of you simultaneously telling everyone how you're not going to be reading OSNews anymore while also posting 25 messages to this story. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 20:47:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (David) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80712 http://osnews.com/thread?80712 Cripes. Other than to troll, I can't think of a single good reason to post anonymously at OSNews. An unpopular opinion, argued calmly and logically, won't be modded down (though not necessarily modded up). If it is modded down, well .. C'est la vie. The world will not be a poorer place because an unpopular opinion about an operating system couldn't be heard on OSNews. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 20:54:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (david g) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80724 http://osnews.com/thread?80724 "God, it mustn't be fun to be a in a group with you."

That's the "personal attack" in the comment. Whenever you criticize someone's personality or character, you are treading the line of making a "personal attack."

The bait here is ignoring the commentary that instigates the response that can be considered a "personal attack," and rationalizing it through an expectation of inequity under the guise of "professionalism." For example, if a party lies about another party, and the latter party subsequently refers to the former party as a liar, the latter party is attacking the former party.

From OSNews forum rules:

1. No gratuitous use of profanity, biting sarcasm, or personal disparagement, especially directed at individuals.
2. No personal attacks on story authors, other commenters or news editors of this web site.
3. Even if you are in violent disagreement or have strong feelings, find a way to keep your comments calm, and try to explain your reasoning, not just rant.

Emphasis has been added to relevant text fragments.

The rules as stated do not leave much discretion, so any variation from them by the staff or other posters can be construed as violations or hypocrisy. Since certain parties find entertainment in provoking authority figures to engage in hypocrisy, any opportunity provided will be seized upon.

Some consideration for altering the rules to provide sensible exceptions explicitly may clarify the matter. Sun, 01 Jan 2006 21:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Get a Life) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80753 http://osnews.com/thread?80753 If you can't see this, my guess is that you haven't been looking. If you thing unpopular views doesn't get modded down you haven't been looking. And while the world might not be a worse place for it, it certainly makes this site less attractive.

Further, why would anyone really need to know who wrote a particular posting? You do have a brain, you can judge for your self, and not have to rely on that persons average score. This is especially true since staff here seems to make the totally bogus assumption that a posting that is modded up is somehow of better quality. ANYONE who has been watching knows this just isn't true, the chance is just as big that it got modded up because someone liked what they read. No point in arguing that, it happens here all the time. Thus scores are not only useless, they are worse than that as they might be directly misleading, since a high average might just as well mean that it was written by someone with popular views, even if what's in the post is horseshit. And on the other hand the oposite might be true for people with negative averages. Also don't try telling me registered users don't troll. I've lost count on the nuber of "KDE 5Ux0rZ", "QT-licensing is a problem" troll-posts I've seen in threads about KDE or QT that was posted by registered users.

So the conclusion is that disabling anonymous postings is a cure worse than the disease, since it detracts a lot, for no real gain. That's the problem. All IMO, obviously. ;-)Browser: ELinks/0.10.6 (textmode; Linux 2.6.14.5 i686; 117x52-2) Mon, 02 Jan 2006 00:23:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80754 http://osnews.com/thread?80754 The bait here is ignoring the commentary that instigates the response that can be considered a "personal attack," and rationalizing it through an expectation of inequity under the guise of "professionalism."

Please use smaller words; I can't understand them big ones. :-D

For example, if a party lies about another party, and the latter party subsequently refers to the former party as a liar, the latter party is attacking the former party.

No, I'd say that the latter party is defending itself. There's a difference between throwing a punch at a person who's just minding his own business and throwing a punch at a person who just knocked you down. I don't think you can ignore the context of an event without distorting its meaning. I think a proper interpretation of the rules would recognize this.

Since certain parties find entertainment in provoking authority figures to engage in hypocrisy, any opportunity provided will be seized upon.

I wish I could mod this statement +5, Insightful. Trolls enjoy disrupting useful discussion, and Thom would give them far less to work with if he just responded a bit more calmly.

Trollbait against an authority figure is usually in the form of a potential slam. Trolls post something infuriating yet stupid, and if the authority figure includes at least one even mildly abrasive remark, the trap is sprung. Other people will join in to defend the troll from unfair attacks by the staff, at which point the staff treat them the same as the trolls. The goal is met: the discussion is disrupted. The original troll can just sit back and watch the fireworks.

I've found that the most insidious way to deal with this particular kind of troll is to respond with lighthearted humor or even a compliment. He simply doesn't know what to do with it. Think about it: not only has he failed to incite anger and disrupt the conversation, but he's the one put on the spot. Once that trap is disarmed, it's almost child's play to deal with the troll's post intellectually. At this point, if he doesn't respond calmly and rationally, he's exposed as a troll. And if he does respond calmly and rationally, he's already set himself up to defend a ridiculous position.

But that's just my suggestion. If Thom doesn't follow it, I'm not going to follow him around everywhere and demand that he do so. I hope other people will be refrain from being abrasive with the staff, too.

Some consideration for altering the rules to provide sensible exceptions explicitly may clarify the matter.

Maybe the word "unprovoked" could be added to some of the passages to make everyone happy. Mon, 02 Jan 2006 00:33:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (null_pointer_us) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80762 http://osnews.com/thread?80762 If you can't see this, my guess is that you haven't been looking. If you thing unpopular views doesn't get modded down you haven't been looking. And while the world might not be a worse place for it, it certainly makes this site less attractive.

I don't see large swathes of posts moderated below the standard threshold - some, yes, but there are always a few posts which violate the rules. You should consider whether the posts in question were moderated down for other reasons. According to the rules, an otherwise good post can be moderated down for bad language, personal attacks, and other disruptive commentary. I've moderated some posts down for these very reasons.

On the other hand, if they were moderated down for their opinions, then that appears to be valid now. The warning for negative moderation includes a "Yes, I disagree with this user/opinion" link. I have no idea why this changed.

Further, why would anyone really need to know who wrote a particular posting?

It discourages chronic trolling. If a person wishes to continue trolling, he must go to the trouble of creating additional nicks and switching between them. Most people who want to troll do it impulsively and won't bother going through the process of circumventing the moderation system. And even if they do, it becomes a little suspicious when people with 1.00 scores keep showing up to defend the troll's actions. ;-)

You do have a brain, you can judge for your self, and not have to rely on that persons average score. This is especially true since staff here seems to make the totally bogus assumption that a posting that is modded up is somehow of better quality. ANYONE who has been watching knows this just isn't true, the chance is just as big that it got modded up because someone liked what they read. No point in arguing that, it happens here all the time. Thus scores are not only useless, they are worse than that as they might be directly misleading, since a high average might just as well mean that it was written by someone with popular views, even if what's in the post is horseshit. And on the other hand the oposite might be true for people with negative averages.

You are correct, of course, but the inaccuracy of the scores is the nature of the beast. It's a permanent work in progress. People have to keep checking whether a post modded +5 is really that good and whether a post modded -5 is really that bad and adjusting them accordingly. It works often enough because people are usually opinionated enough to doubt other posters by tinkering with the scores a bit. Mon, 02 Jan 2006 00:52:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (null_pointer_us) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80774 http://osnews.com/thread?80774 It will quite probably to a large extent turn the comments section into a "club of mutual admiration" thingy...

Because, goodness knows, the registered users on Slashdot all agree with one another. Each and every one of us, we're right-wing liberal environmentalist Kantian objectivists, all Linux-using pro-Apple Microsoft apologists, GPL-hating free software advocates with communistic capitalist bents.

I'm neutral on disabling anonymous posts and I have my disagreements with OS News staff decisions, past and present, but the assertion that requiring someone to go through a free registration process is "closing the community" is nonsense. Yes, it dissuades people who aren't willing to take the time to do that, and that probably does dissuade people who aren't often moved to comment from ever commenting. But the bar is equally high for people on any side of a given issue. That the group of users who are willing to register for an account is definitionally going to be heavily tilted toward people who don't mind going through a registration process doesn't mean there isn't "room for dissent" on any other issue. I see registered users bitch about articles here all the time, and there's absolutely no reason to think that's going to stop. Mon, 02 Jan 2006 02:08:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (wattsm) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80776 http://osnews.com/thread?80776 "That's uncanny, because any _honest_ regular reader won't be able to remember a single justifiable reason to remove anonymous posting in the first place."

You don't speak for me on this issue. Because as a regular reader I can honestly say I applaud the decision to ban anonymous posting. As far as I am concerned the fact that someone posts inflammatory remarks that they are afraid to claim as there own is a very justifiable reason for the ban. If you are ashamed of what you have to say then don't say it. Are you too ashamed to post under a recognizable handle?

Bill Mon, 02 Jan 2006 02:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (protagonist) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80778 http://osnews.com/thread?80778 bah! My nested comment table code is infinitely worse than OSNews could ever be. Mon, 02 Jan 2006 02:35:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Beryllium) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80788 http://osnews.com/thread?80788 My personal grudges? I had always liked you until I knew you not from SkyOS but from OSNews. You really are doing everything these people are saying. Hell, I'm replying to a personal attack (ouch, by the way). And on the administrative side of things, I can't believe how rewarding it is to see you become everything you hated about Kelly. Mon, 02 Jan 2006 03:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Alex Forster) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?80816 http://osnews.com/thread?80816 So the conclusion is that disabling anonymous postings is a cure worse than the disease, since it detracts a lot, for no real gain.

And how does it detract? You haven't answered why anonymous posting is so very valuable. Do you fear that someone will visit you personally in anger because they disagree with your post on OSNews? If this were a political or otherwise hot-button-issue site, I might give you the argument. But it's not.

Post as a registered user. What's the worst that can happen? What value do anonymous posts add that registered posts cannot? I ask these questions honestly.Edited 2006-01-02 07:51 Mon, 02 Jan 2006 07:48:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (david g) Comments